Exploring the Effects of Fruit Brand Names on Consumer Preferences: A Case Study of Apple Consumer Behavior
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Despite the recognized impact of brand names on consumer behavior, limited research has specifically explored how brand names affect customers' fruit quality perceptions and preferences. The main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of apple brand names, as a case study, on consumers' brand recognition and preferences, considering their purchase and consumption behaviors and demographics. Consumer preferences toward four apple brand name categories were specifically investigated: sensory component names (SCN), metaphoric names (MN), non‐metaphoric names (NMN), and innovative spelling names (ISN). A total of 526 Canadian residents participated in an online survey, and 517 submitted responses were accepted. Names from the SCN category were liked the most and disliked the least. Names from the MN category were disliked less than those from NMN and ISN categories. Names from the ISN category were disliked the most. Overall, the results highlighted the significance of brand names, with SCN being associated with greater recognition and preference.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it